Jacksonville Jaguars Fan Forums

Quote:So here's another question.  Was this transaction illegal in any way?

If it proves out that there is concrete evidence that those hostages release was contingent on that payment , then yes.

This was, in fact called out in January and confirmed well before now.

 

It's not some "new" story.  It's only "new" in the sense the useful idiots weren't successful in suppressing the story forever.  The truth eventually emerged even after efforts of burying it.

 

http://dailycaller.com/2016/08/04/iran-c...-listened/

Quote:If it proves out that there is concrete evidence that those hostages release was contingent on that payment , then yes.

 

Well the angle that I'm getting at is essentially money laundering took place in order to circumvent U.S. law.  That's probably part of the answer to the question that TAM refuses to answer which is "why would the Obama regime refuse to disclose how the payment was going to be made, even after Congressional inquiry"?  The answer to the question is because the way that the payment was made was illegal.

Quote:Well the angle that I'm getting at is essentially money laundering took place in order to circumvent U.S. law.  That's probably part of the answer to the question that TAM refuses to answer which is "why would the Obama regime refuse to disclose how the payment was going to be made, even after Congressional inquiry"?  The answer to the question is because the way that the payment was made was illegal.

If a US corporation had done the same in an attempt to do business it would have been criminal. They circumvented basically every law that sanctions had put in place to prevent business being done in Iran.

 

 

I guess the business of government does not count. Not to mention, the United States does not pay for hostages, legally at least.

The motherlode of crow to eat for some in this thread.

 

But then, same as it ever was.  The truth never rings "true" for some.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/08/18/state-depar...s-release/

 

Can't wait to hear the spin machine crank up the excuse machine, again, again.

"Never believe anything until it is officially denied".

 

Of course it was a ransom payment.

Quote:The motherlode of crow to eat for some in this thread.

 

But then, same as it ever was.  The truth never rings "true" for some.

 

http://nypost.com/2016/08/18/state-depar...s-release/

 

Can't wait to hear the spin machine crank up the excuse machine, again, again.

I hope you're not holding your breath for a response worth noting.  Even if they do respond, it will be Hillary-esque with the "What difference at this point does it make?" response.  Remember, if it's something their messiah or their pantsuit princess does, they're always going to revert to "TRUMP IS A RACIST!  TRUMP IS UNFIT!  TRUMP TRUMP TRUMP!"

Funny that the only mainstream media outlets reporting on it are the following.

 

FOX News

Breitbart

Wall Street Journal

New York Post

Associated Press (where many media outlets get a lot of their stories)

 

Nothing from

 

ABC

CBS

CNN

NBC

New York Times

L.A. Times

Quote:Nothing from

 

ABC

CBS

CNN

NBC

New York Times

L.A. Times

 

The propaganda machine is in full campaign mode.

ABC - CBS - CNN - NBC - New York Times - L.A. Times.

 

This is why I pay no attention to these entities and automatically subtract 30 Hillary points from all their polls.  I watched the CBS Evening News last night and they covered the story by saying something like, "Republicans are now claiming it was ransom". 

 

No, it was the State Department and U.S. Treasury claiming it was ransom. 

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/...yer-funds/

 

Still hiding the truth and stonewalling.

 

Plus, unless I'm mistaken, they have yet to name who actually received the money.  But then, I don't think anyone would expect such a shady deal to have any paper trail of any legal kind.